28 Jan
2007
28 Jan
'07
9:01 a.m.
On 1/28/07, Chris Cannam <cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com> wrote:
On Saturday 27 Jan 2007 18:57, Nedko Arnaudov wrote:
mmm. I'm sorry for my arrogant and antisocial habits. I had once again
a little bit of food poisioning or something and i'd just been hiking
near tibet and hadn't had a shower for 1 and half weeks. I was more
aiming at getting at there is not point in suggesting problems/issues
with the ladspa spec as it is no longer being developed. So either you
deal with it's downsides or you write LV2 plugins. It's not like i can
really talk as i haven't ported any of my own ladspa plugins to LV2.
As far as hosts go ingen supports lv2 and is a quite powerful host.
Then again no sequencer or DAW that i know of... ;) then again i'm
quite out of the loop at the moment.
Loki
p.s i hope this doesn't come across as arrogant, your comments about
nothing may seem that way to the authors of those hosts.
Robert Jonsson <rj(a)spamatica.se> writes:
What are they? Do they do anything else, besides host LV2 plugins?
There does seem to be a habit here for people to describe things as
"deprecated", when what they mean is they don't like them very much
themselves, they no longer consider them state of the art, and there's
a technically better alternative that isn't widely supported yet. (The
ALSA sequencer API is another current example.) It's an arrogant and
antisocial habit.
On Saturday 27 January 2007 06:47, Loki Davison
wrote:
nothing? i'm aware of 3 hosts that can host lv2 plugins. why are you coding new stuff for a depreciated
system? Why not
LV2?
And why should you code for a plugin standard that nothing
supports? [...]